On 12/13/06, Thilo Goetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we've come full circle. I don't like this approach since it tries to hide a fundamental change in the way we think about CASes (from single-artifact to multi-artifact etc.) under the current APIs.
I don't agree that this is full circle. It provides a clean new API for new users to adopt. It does leave a few messy deprecated methods, but they are clearly marked, so new users can easily steer clear of them and existing users will be encouraged to migrate to the new API.
I can only restate what I said earlier: to my mind, conceptual clarity of the APIs is more important than backward compatility.
Well we probably have to answer this question of philosophy before we can make technical progress. I'm unwilling to make such an unconditional statement. I think backward compatibility is very important, and that we should seriously consider the option of deprecating things rather than removing them. -Adam
